SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Raj) 116

B.R.ARORA
Rikhab Chand – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B. Advani, for Petitioner Chandra Lekha, Public Prosecutor.

Honble B.R. ARORA, J.—This miscellaneous petition is directed against the orders dated September 22,1990 and February 11,1991, passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Siwana, by which the learned Magistrate closed the evidence of the prosecution and also, dismissed the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor.

2. On the basis of the written report submitted by Rikhab Chand at Police Station, Siwana, a case under Sections 420 and 392 I.P.C. was registered against Shanti Lal. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the cha-llan in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Siwana, and Shanti Lal is facing trial for the offences under Sections 420 and 392 I.PC. In the Calendar of Witnesses, the names of fifty-five witnesses were given and out of whom, thirty-four witnesses have already been examined and the remaining witnesses could not be examined as the prosecution failed to produce those witnesses. The learned Magistrate, by his order dated September 22, 1990, ordered for closure of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on the ground that the matter relates to the year 1982 and the trial of the case has not yet been




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top